The lottery question asks whether you would stop working, continue working in the same job or continue working in a different job if you won a sum of money large enough to allow you to live on it comfortably for the rest of your life without working. This literature review reports the results of 22 surveys carried out between 1955 and 2005 where this issue was raised in connection with basic income, and devotes specific attention to how the results have hitherto been analyzed. Used as a measure of employability, other dimensions of the lottery question, such as occupational discontent and satisfaction beyond economic necessity, have been largely overshadowed despite their prominence in the statistical material. The prevalence of non-financial employment commitment (NEC) has also been overestimated because of an analytical dichotomy between those who would continue working and those who would stop working completely if finances permitted. Suggestions for further studies include a clear distinction between non-financial commitment to current employment and to employment as such.

Ed. by Haagh, Louise / Mulvale, James
2 Issues per year
Issues
Volume 7 (2012)
Volume 6 (2011)
Volume 5 (2010)
Volume 4 (2009)
Volume 2 (2007)
Most Downloaded Articles
- How Cash Transfers Promote the Case for Basic Income by Standing, Guy
- Reconsidering the Exploitation Objection to Basic Income by White, Stuart
- Review of Gijs van Donselaar, The Right to Exploit: Parasitism, Scarcity, Basic Income by Rey Pérez, Jose Luis
- Classical Liberalism and the Basic Income by Zwolinski, Matt
- Libertarianism and the Justice of a Basic Income by Vallentyne, Peter
Economically Forced to Work: A Critical Reconsideration of the Lottery Question
Roland Paulsen
1University of Uppsala
Citation Information: Basic Income Studies. Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages –, ISSN (Online) 1932-0183, DOI: 10.2202/1932-0183.1104, November 2008
Publication History:
- Published Online:
- 2008-11-19
Keywords: Keywords – basic income; lottery question; non-financial employment commitment; occupational satisfaction; workfare


















Comments (0)